The appeals court ruling will mean an end, for now at least, to horror stories of Muslim travelers, including legal permanent USA residents, refugees approved for resettlement in the country, residents of European Union nations and Canada, and even children requiring life-saving surgery being turned away from the US or being detained and deported upon arrival here.
Advertisement
Purcell cited Trump’s campaign call for a complete ban on Muslims entering the United States.
The court asked that challengers of the ban respond to the appeal, and for the Justice Department to file a counter-response.
He followed up early yesterday with a tweet calling the court’s ruling “a disgraceful decision!”
As for his plans to take his stalled executive order further?
“We had students and faculty at our state universities who were stranded overseas, we had families that were separated”, Purcell said.
Sign up to our daily newsletter for your chance to win. The president also added that he may also introduce “new security measures” among the revisions of the order.
Meanwhile, a USA federal appeals court asked the Justice Department and the state of Washington to submit briefs on whether a larger panel of judges should decide if Mr Trump’s travel ban should remain on hold. “You’ll be seeing that sometime next week”, Trump said speaking at the White House. Trump’s nominee, Neil Gorsuch, probably could not be confirmed in time to take part in any consideration of the ban, which would expire in 90 days unless it is changed. “It’s very important for the country”. If something happens blame him and court system.
Well, if the Supreme Court declines to intervene right away, the case would remain in the 9th Circuit and ultimately be considered on its legal merits. The court also provides video and audio recordings of all oral arguments on the court’s public website by 12:00 p.m. The bench included Judges William C Canby Jr, Richard R Clifton, and Michelle T Friedland.
I actually think that the president has the better of the legal arguments, totally setting aside whether this is good policy or bad policy.
“It i9s extraordinary for a court to enjoy a President’s national security determination based on some newspaper articles”, Flentje argued, referring to stories about Trump’s past declarations on Muslims.
“This is not that ban”, Clifton cautioned. But temporary restraining orders are brief, and Robart is beginning to arrange a hearing for a preliminary injunction, which could stay in place much longer, according to USA Today. A judge on the 9th Circuit was bothered by the opinion so badly, they demanded the whole en banc panel review.
Thd Niners decision will have a lot of impact on a lot of lives.
Advertisement
Prior to Robart’s restraining order, officials from the State and Justice departments revealed that about 60,000 – and possibly as many as 100,000 – have been revoked as a result of Trump’s executive order.
